Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday March 05 2018, @11:01AM   Printer-friendly
from the another-list dept.

Eleven U.S. states have pending animal abuse registry legislation:

Son of Sam, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer and the Columbine High School shooters are among the infamous criminals who had a history of hurting animals before they went on to target humans, a tendency that's part of what's behind a movement to create public online registries of known animal abusers.

New York is among 11 states with animal abuse registry bills pending in their legislatures, following Tennessee, which started its in 2016 along with a growing number of municipalities in recent years, including New York City, and the counties that include Chicago and Tampa, Florida.

"Animal abuse is a bridge crime," said the sponsor of New York's bill, Republican state Sen. Jim Tedisco, who noted that Nikolas Cruz, accused of killing 17 people in the Parkland, Florida, high school shooting on Feb. 14, reportedly also had a history of shooting small animals.

While the main goal of collecting names of convicted animal abusers is to prevent them from being able to adopt or purchase other animals, registry backers say such lists could also be a way to raise red flags about people who may commit other violent crimes ranging from domestic violence to mass shootings. But some animal welfare advocates, mostly notably the ASPCA, question how effective they can really be.

[Ed's Comment - Original link unreliable, so I have added additional links]
Additional Sources:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday March 05 2018, @09:06PM (2 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday March 05 2018, @09:06PM (#648174)

    No, registries are not "human abuse". What do you think it is when someone is on parole? That's effectively the same thing: someone is a registered criminal, but instead of locking them up in prison, they get to stay outside, as long as they stay out of trouble, check in with their parole officer, etc. There's also "work release" where they can go out, but with their freedom very constrained (can go to work and back to prison), there's various other freedom-limiting schemes out there, esp. in other countries that aren't so harsh on convicts. People get put on registries when they've been convicted of something normally.

    What's abuse is when people on these registries are harassed so much (e.g., not being able to live anywhere because there's literally no place except under some bridge where they aren't within a certain distance of a school) that they can't live a somewhat-normal life, or when they're put on registries for completely wrong and stupid reasons, or the registries are totally misused (e.g., two teenagers have sex, and are now treated as child molesters forevermore). These aren't problems with registries per se, these are problems of a broken justice system. But broken justice systems have other problems too, like wrongful convictions or bad trials where the jurors are racists and convict someone because of that; does that mean we just shouldn't have convictions or trials? Obviously not.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 05 2018, @10:52PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 05 2018, @10:52PM (#648235)

    Bail / parole are not the same as a registry, but being a lifetime "felon" certainly is and we should reverse that policy. How can you guarantee people won't be harassed? You can't, therefore creating such registries is a crime against the human being punished. Such registries can't even stop the convicted from re-offending so the basic premise itself is flawed.

    I personally do prefer to live in a free country and believe it is better for a society's psychology to not be in constant fear of perceived transgressions. Think of the edge cases before you promote legislation that will ruin innocent lives and have marginal value against the guilty aside from continued punishment with little practical value.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Reziac on Tuesday March 06 2018, @03:33AM

      by Reziac (2489) on Tuesday March 06 2018, @03:33AM (#648346) Homepage

      USDA recently removed its licensee list (or at least their addresses) from its website, because whatever legit use anyone got from the list was overshadowed by PETA types using it to harass licensees (including major destruction of private property).

      So yeah, I already know how public lists of "abusers" will get used.

      Under California state law, having an animal for sale in a public place is "abuse". Having an unlicensed dog can also be prosecuted as "abuse". In San Francisco, a recent law makes not providing 'quality' food or bedding is "abuse" (despite that what constitutes 'quality' is left to the imagination of the prosecutor). Tying up a dog is "abuse" (and the way it's written, hooking a leash on the fence while you tie your shoe could be prosecuted).

      So yeah, it's already right up there with public urination getting you on a "sex offender" list.

      --
      And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.